I'm not sure if you're actually that delusional, but racism, bigotry, and prejudice play significant roles in the history of the West.

It plays a significant role in the history of the world.

Fact is that a lot of people who never actually do these things are branded as such for speaking out against those in positions of power.

Criticize Islam, immigration policies (or lack thereof), jews (like what got Alex Jones banned), or literally any facet of "progressive' politics and you will be dismissed as simply being a bigot.

You probably buy the Family Guy pushed myth that Walt Disney hated jews despite the fact that these unfounded accusations only arose after he testified against Herb Sorrel at the HUAC because Herb was tight with the communist party. Strangely, after that, Walt apparently was an anti-semite despite no jew working for him agreeing with the accusations. The Daily Worker (which you should really Google and see who owned that paper) published no shortage of hit pieces on those who opposed their ideology, which has lead to many outright lies being widely accepted as truth in the public consciousness.

When massive tech companies have been subsidized for years, since the vital point of their start-ups (especially for Apple and YouTube) they can hardly be considered "private" anymore, they aren't just a mom'n'pops store competing like everyone else. Even after becoming established- all 4 of these companies are consistently given massive tax breaks, to the cost of way over a billion dollars of tax payer money (combined, but the most of this being towards Facebook alone) over the last decade, we can't pretend that this is just another competitor to social media platforms.

And they are no longer "platforms" when they edit content, they become "publishers". In cases like social media the ToS has to be clear or at least updated with consistency towards all parties.

If someone doesn't want to personalise a cake for a gay couple then that's their version of a clear ToS, but when these rules are not made clear or applied consistently, you can't suddenly decide that someone's been breaking your terms for many years and effectively censor all of their content.

Especially in Alex Jones case, the content he's been putting our for the last year has been incredibly take by his standards. Everyone keeps talking about Sandy Hook and Pizzagate, if it was so bad then why wasn't he banned then?

Oh because mid-terms are coming up, and he was highly influential in losing Hillary an election. Whatever you think about legally regulating "private" monopolised corporations, I can't see why anyone isn't taking an issue here with the complete collusion of social media giants, especially when none of them have at all been transparent about their actions.

"I’m not sure why republicans conservatives libertarians would be upset that a company decides someone is not in line with their own values and therefore Takes away his right to use their platforms."

Because in this case, it was companies (plural), not a singular company. It was very clearly a coordinated effort made by Google, Facebook, Apple and Spotify all within the span of just several hours to suspend & suppress Alex Jones under very shady pretenses.

"This has always been the republican mantra. Companies are people too and have the right to refuse services."

Indeed they do. The problem is the very general, vague reasoning these companies gave. When these tech companies claim to be arbiters of free speech and have a zero tolerance of hate speech, and do shit like this whilst completely ignoring black nationalists or Muslims spewing actual, true hate speech unfettered you can't just shrug your shoulders and think nothing's wrong. Double standards are double standards.

"A gay couple want a cake. It’s against the bakers religeon and they say no. The republican support the baker. Okay fair enoug
Ales Jones says atrocious things against the majority of people’s moral fiber (republican and Democrats) and some are losing thei shit."

As @Admin said, there is a big difference between a small town bakery refusing to serve gays and social media giants who have a global audience and whose influence on world affairs cannot be understated. Alex Jones does say very incendiary things, the problem though isn't that "some are losing their shit," it's about him being silenced in a coordinated effort by the biggest social media and podcast/streaming outlets.

"Why? Because he has no other platform? Eh he can find one he has plenty of money. His followers can buy more products. "

True enough, but this is detracting from the main point at hand, which is Jones' unfair mass suspension.

"Amazon with indie authors and filmmakers for years has very haphazard banning rules. They give authors very little guidance and it is kind of hit or miss and has nothing to do with politics it’s more thei own sense of what’s objectionable (usually sexual and violence).
No one on the right has lost their shit over artists not haveiing crate Blanche to express themselves.
Again Facebook for years is very haphazard on their banning of profiles, advertisements, postings for years.
Where has the outrage on the right been? Silent except when it effects people they are lined up with"

What do you mean by Facebook being haphazard? You do know the majority of those who've been getting banned lately are conservatives, right? Where's the outrage on the left for people with right-leaning viewpoints being censored en masse?

"I’m sorry I still remember it was republicans who wrote letters to advertisers to try and ban Married with Children and who protested Robert Mapplethorpe photo exhibits and again stand by the baker who didn’t serve the gay couple."

Did Fox cave in to Republicans & cancel the show? Were Mapplethrope’s exhibits taken down? I don’t believe so. And standing by a small town baker who didn’t want to bake a cake for gays? That is not remotely in the league of a major voice in news (for better or for worse) simultaneously getting silenced by the world’s biggest social media & podcast outlets.

"The outrage seems super selective and nothing to do with the policy except when it negatively effects one of their own."

And only Republicans are guilty of this? Don’t make me laugh. Just look at the reaction towards James Gunn's firing compared to Roseanne's.

"What is the alternative? Govt interference? Lol"

I don’t think that is a sensible solution. But perhaps complacent liberals like yourself need to connect the dots and realize that if this can happen to a figure as well known as Jones, it can surely happen to anyone else these tech giants deem “undesirable,” whomever that might be. I think that’s the main takeaway here, at least it was for me. Alex Jones, whether you like him or not is a very well known figure and not just some small time political commentator. For him to essentially get axed by a multiple social media and podcast outlets under bullshit pretenses should raise red flags for anybody who’s remotely concerned with civil liberties.

"Also free speech is very misunderstood by a lot of people. You have the right to speak. A company does not owe that person a place to voice it."

This is true enough, can’t refute it. Still, like I said earlier, you can’t portray your company as an arbiter of free speech (only disallowing hate speech) when you clearly don’t hold everyone to the same standards.

google hypocrisy.PNG (118.89 KiB) Viewed 841 times

"So what’s the issue then? It’s a monopoly? He can create pod casts and sell them on his own website ..again monopolies are not something that In this country people on the right have not had a huge issue with compared to the left with judges they support and policies they vote on."

Well yes, that’s one of the issues. You can’t reasonably create an alternative to YouTube, since you won’t get nearly the same amount of exposure, recognition, etc. You might be able to convince several thousand like minded people to convert, but for the billions elsewhere around the world you’re trying to spread your message to? Good luck with that.

You really do yourself a disservice when you fail to mention the context in which these comments were made.

Are you ignorant or just plain manipulative? Or maybe you desperately want to believe that these comments made by Sarah Jeong were a serious and honest put down of white people and our culture?
They were satire!

These comments were an attempt to mimic the online abuse miss Jeong (of Asian descent) faces daily.
She used the words and phrases of her attackers to highlight how ridiculous they sound, replacing the word "Asian" with "white."

These comments were an attempt to mimic the online abuse miss Jeong (of Asian descent) faces daily.
She used the words and phrases of her attackers to highlight how ridiculous they sound, replacing the word "Asian" with "white."

He's a postmodern neomarxist as Jordan Peterson (TRIGGERED!) would say.

To him, everything is about power™. Online trolls are trying to dominate her with power so her only move is to attack them back with the same power move. There is no other strategy possible since only power exists and it is the only thing governing human interactions.

And this reply is clearly a power move against cuckg. And all he'll be able to do now is to use power™ to try to put me down.

He's a postmodern neomarxist as Jordan Peterson (TRIGGERED!) would say.

To him, everything is about power™. Online trolls are trying to dominate her with power so her only move is to attack them back with the same power move. There is no other strategy possible since only power exists and it is the only thing governing human interactions.

And this reply is clearly a power move against cuckg. And all he'll be able to do now is to use power™ to try to put me down.

What a sad way of construing human interactions.

I've just always thought of you as a reasonable, intelligent man. You're far more intelligent than I could hope to be and you're English is exceptional for a non native English speaker.
That's why it disappoints me when you fail to tell the whole story regarding any particular issue.

Anyway I don't know why you keep bringing up this power play move?
Maybe my blunt style has a lot to answer for.

End of the day they keep packing the Supreme Court with originalist judges I don’t think it will matter. They won’t allow a Gov regulation of any industry.

I've never met a person who is a legitimate fullblood Libertarian in my life, they can believe in the principle as I do but ultimately if they see this censorship issue as potentially destructive to their political cause they will act in their own best interest, which is quite rational in reality. I think most people Libertarian or otherwise can see the danger in the major platforms of communication in 2018 being chopped and censored according to the sole guidelines of the companies enacting them, particularly in a way that isn't consistent across the board. No one can pretend that the largest sources of media in the world censoring Alex Jones months before the midterm elections but not those who are pro-Jihadist or advocating globalised Sharia law is anything but political, and further damaging the media and freedom of information as a whole. The media is less trusted than ever and this just makes people like Jones come out as martyrs.

Agree fully on Afro's point that the big tech companies should be treated like utilities, and it particularly makes sense from a conservative perspective when they are run by liberals.

Anyway back to the censorship on Facebook/YouTube/Twitter issue: if they keep on doing that, all those social media are going to become sterile and boring as fuck, just like HairlossTalk these days, and more and more people are just going to lose interest and leave, hopefully to other platforms that are going to be developed as a result.

Hairlosstalk is made up of advertisers now. It's a bullshit platform, and it serves no purpose anymore,
other than being Bald Truth Talk part II.

It's a bunch of shit.
It's by far gone the same way has Facebook, which means down the toilet. I can't
think of a better analogy than that.

I think the reason Antydhor, and other people got banned was because it competed
with the Admin's products, which really suck.

He is selling things that don't even work, like shampoo and other items that don't do shit.